Humanity Will Fail If It Fails to Love

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Aug 16, 2011 at 12:07

Indeed, it has been said that humanity appears to be in some kind of race; that overcoming the world and obtaining some kind of control over life is the goal. How that is done has been contemplated and performed and is displayed throughout history with the results being spotty at best and quite astonishingly shocking at worst. What is seen in this example in jihad by some is the culmination of a process of achieving that goal, the only question being, was the cost worth it?

An answer comes to mind: in American legal parlance, it depends.

For an individual, just being born into this worldly environment begins a process of finding the self against seemingly insurmountable odds, then trying to figure out what to do with it. The learning process is difficult at all times, even for those whose intelligence seems to make things easy. But life is not easy, it only seems that way for some; but it still requires how to prepare for the inevitability of its end. Therein lays the conundrum.

However, we are not alone. In a corporate sense each individual is a part at a minimum of the larger picture of the world, of billions of lives lived and passed over centuries and millennia, some never learning or knowing how to have lived in some kind of harmony, never having done it right, never finding peace. We find in that part, to have done it right, to be the most compelling aspect of life; how is that part accomplished?

We'll not go over all the various ways differing philosophies have treated this subject, keeping confined to the subject matter of this forum, and of the prompt of the postulation of the previous post.

Now there is mentioned here, if jihad is the means for many to achieve some form of ideological measure of accomplishment, and it is supposed to be an individual's sense of accomplishment, why then are others who do not share that same ideology compelled to pay with their lives for that individual's achievement? On the surface of it, it appears quite selfish. And further, if that achievement is supposed to have some effective witness for a belief, why do those who prompt the extreme form of the behavior exhibited in taking lives to accomplish jihad teach what they themselves would not do?

Some will say that jihad is necessary to account for the oppression they are supposed to be working against. If anger and envy and other issues of being human are at the core of the inhumanities directed towards others who do not follow accordingly, then there is seen the central issue, that the base sinfulness of such actions are exposed for what they are, yet are not halted for the apathy sometimes expressed by others not understanding what is being perpetrated. Simply put, jihad is made to be the tool for many who are not content and cannot achieve an inner peace except at the cost of others. The problem is, no peace is achieved in that manner.

So if jihad fails to achieve what it is supposed to do, how does the soul of the jihadist fare? Angry or fearful, or whatever the emotion at the moment of decision, it cannot be good for the soul to leave mortality behind and the soul never getting past the emotion of the event-angry then, angry still. Is that anyway to be in eternity?

It is written: gain the whole world, but what is the profit if you lost the soul?

But let us move aside and look at the other form of discontent as displayed in Britain and elsewhere, of anarchy practiced for the sake of chaos. The lack of order and the abuse of the rule of law are further examples of a society that has yet to do the best it could for its citizens, that of teaching how to achieve the better ideal, of peace for the self, and for the benefit of others. The source of that enmity comes from the Adversary of humanity, and from the co-conspirators deluded into thinking this is the way the earth should be governed. Mankind is reduced into the delusion of separating by some means of distinguishing one from another, like ethnicity, then to have envy induced by anger to cause the strife that will eventually break out into riot, then all out war. Why does mankind encounter such thinking only to let it escalate? Why does it move to the extreme and, for example, make it seem important to obtain nuclear weapons if peace is sought after? It is antithetical thinking; yet it is the sum total of human reasoning, to destroy that which does not conform to the ideology of the weapon holder. Is there any wonder still there is the term doomsday?

Search the world over and find there is only one place to gain peace. Wait too long; and peace will never be achieved unless and until there is obedience to love. And this reader knows of only One Person that guarantees that love.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".